Can we legalize lane filtering yet?

[Roadghost]

Forum Sponsor

Some of the responses that I've received to the same arguments.

-- Most people have no desire to ride single track vehicles and mileage between cars and bikes is variable. Compare a Litre bike to a hybrid, for example.
-- Given that traffic moves at a given speed and following distances are significantly bigger than the vehicles involved, savings are minimal.
-- Cars have much more stringent emissions controls than do motorcycles. Motorcycles, at best, have an open loop EFI system, which can only be so efficient.
-- As stated above, not everyone wants to ride a motorcycle. They will remain a tiny fraction of all vehicles.
-- Increasing the number of single occupant vehicles in the HOV lanes doesn't actually address the problem of congestion as well as getting two or more people in a given vehicle does.
-- Reductions in rear end collisions with motorcyclists are statistically negligible, in the greater scheme of things, and benefits are not demonstrable.

-- While mileage between cars and bikes may be variable, on average motorcycles get far better fuel mileage than cars. Since most four wheelers are in fact SUVs, Vans, pickup trucks and are NOT Honda Civics, even the largest litre Superbikes are economical in comparison to say, a Dodge Challenger SRT or a Toyota Tundra V8.
-- On the contrary, since bikes would no longer be idling in traffic the savings would be dramatic.
-- Even with the strictest of controls a Lexus V6 SUV is going to produce twice the greenhouse gas of a 1000cc motorcycle based on volumetric efficiency alone.
-- Not everyone wants to ride with another person in the car by carpooling either. The price for that is you can't use the HOV lane. Same would apply for those who don't want to ride a cycle.
-- The HOV lanes themselves don't address the problem of congestion. The HOV idea is to reward those who take steps to be more efficient. Motorcycles are an efficient step too.
-- According to the Ontario Road Safety Annual Report 2012 rear-end collisions were THE largest cause of injury among drivers, documented on page 48 as follows:

[TD="width: 25%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] Rear End
[/TD]
[TD="width: 17%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 35
[/TD]
[TD="width: 20%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 12,598
[/TD]
[TD="width: 22%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 34,171

[/TD]
[TD="width: 15%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] [FONT=Univers,Univers][FONT=Univers,Univers][/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Univers,Univers] [FONT=Univers,Univers][/FONT] [/FONT][FONT=Univers,Univers] [FONT=Univers,Univers]46,804[/FONT] [/FONT]

[/TD]

Link: http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/publications/ontario-road-safety-annual-report.shtml


The arguments for motorcycles using the HOV lanes are very strong. The facts and numbers are on our side. There remains no reason the government should not seriously consider this measure for the good of everyone.

 

[griff2]

Why would u own a bike and wait in traffic...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So you don't end up like g4getmoney?

 

[jc100]

Why would u own a bike and wait in traffic...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(a) not a fan of tickets and insurance hikes (b) I'm not an entitled ******

 

[nm1]

(a) not a fan of tickets and insurance hikes (b) I'm not an entitled ******

Entitlement isn't a factor...you're helping the cars, not hurting them.

An entitled person might say "you should wait in line like me" though...

 

[nm1]

Nm calling people old and too pansy? I'd bet my life he could ride circles around you. This isn't a pissing contest so stop turning it into one. Splitting would take years to make work here. I'll wait with Rob while half the bros go down then consider it. Too many uneducated drivers here for my comfort.

Maybe, but I doubt it - from what I've seen riders in Ontario that aren't club racers are light years behind where I am at just by virtue of sheer miles...learning to ride in California and using my bikes as commuter vehicles year-round in much more intense traffic than the GTA and lane sharing with narrower lanes qualifies me to comment on this issue.

Some retired donut-muncher is not going to ride circles around me without racing experience or having learned to ride somewhere else other than ONT.

I've averaged 25k miles per year in some of the worst traffic in the western world...so yes, if you think lane splitting is too "dangerous" you're probably a pansy and I will call you out on it.

People who have learned to do it safely KNOW that it isn't more dangerous and KNOW that the ridiculous arguments made here "drivers don't expect it in Ontario" "there will be carnage" are just that...ridiculous.

 

[caboose56]

-- While mileage between cars and bikes may be variable, on average motorcycles get far better fuel mileage than cars. Since most four wheelers are in fact SUVs, Vans, pickup trucks and are NOT Honda Civics, even the largest litre Superbikes are economical in comparison to say, a Dodge Challenger SRT or a Toyota Tundra V8.
-- On the contrary, since bikes would no longer be idling in traffic the savings would be dramatic.
-- Even with the strictest of controls a Lexus V6 SUV is going to produce twice the greenhouse gas of a 1000cc motorcycle based on volumetric efficiency alone.
-- Not everyone wants to ride with another person in the car by carpooling either. The price for that is you can't use the HOV lane. Same would apply for those who don't want to ride a cycle.
-- The HOV lanes themselves don't address the problem of congestion. The HOV idea is to reward those who take steps to be more efficient. Motorcycles are an efficient step too.
-- According to the Ontario Road Safety Annual Report 2012 rear-end collisions were THE largest cause of injury among drivers, documented on page 48 as follows:

Rear End

[TD="width: 17%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 35 [/TD]
[TD="width: 20%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 12,598 [/TD]
[TD="width: 22%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 34,171
[/TD]
[TD="width: 15%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 46,804
[/TD]

Link: http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/publications/ontario-road-safety-annual-report.shtml


The arguments for motorcycles using the HOV lanes are very strong. The facts and numbers are on our side. There remains no reason the government should not seriously consider this measure for the good of everyone.

Where are you getting your information from? Please cite your sources. Everything you wrote is wrong or intentionally misleading.

Regarding motorcycles being "green"
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...are-more-polluting-than-cars-new-device-shows
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/08/greenlings-which-is-greener-having-two-wheels-or-four/
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/crttst.htm
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0481023?journalCode=esthag

Most popular vehicles being sold in Canada? A mix of small cars and pickups. Lots of small 4 cylinder econoboxes in this list....
http://driving.ca/ram/1500/auto-news/news/top-10-best-selling-new-vehicles-in-canada
http://www.autofocus.ca/news-events/news/canadas-30-best-selling-vehicles-in-2015

 

[Rob MacLennan]

-- While mileage between cars and bikes may be variable, on average motorcycles get far better fuel mileage than cars. Since most four wheelers are in fact SUVs, Vans, pickup trucks and are NOT Honda Civics, even the largest litre Superbikes are economical in comparison to say, a Dodge Challenger SRT or a Toyota Tundra V8.

A passenger vehicle with three or four people in it has much better per person mileage than does the average motorcycle. Even if I was to accept your incorrect statement that the majority of such passenger vehicles are in fact SUVs, vans, and pickups, my statement still holds up. For example let's look at the 2015 Nissan Pathfinder; a reasonably large SUV. Listed fuel use, city, is 12.1L/100Km. Put 2 people in that vehicle and they are accounting for a little more than 6L/100Km. My real world calculation on fuel consumption for my ER6n, in city riding conditions, came out to something slightly north of 6.5L/100Km.

Change that vehicle to a 2015 Honda Civic and the fuel use drops to 9.1L/100Km city, or just over 4.5L/100Km for each of the two people required for HOV lane use.

-- On the contrary, since bikes would no longer be idling in traffic the savings would be dramatic.

Again, a piddling little number of vehicles, so minimal advantage. And again, the post was talking about HOV lanes, so the idling thing is largely a red herring. No drama involved.

}-- Even with the strictest of controls a Lexus V6 SUV is going to produce twice the greenhouse gas of a 1000cc motorcycle based on volumetric efficiency alone.

See above.

-- Not everyone wants to ride with another person in the car by carpooling either. The price for that is you can't use the HOV lane. Same would apply for those who don't want to ride a cycle.

And those people don't get to use the HOV lanes either. Rather a poor comment to make in defence of your point. If you can convince the Province that motorcycles should be classed as "green vehicles", then you would have a point.

-- The HOV lanes themselves don't address the problem of congestion. The HOV idea is to reward those who take steps to be more efficient. Motorcycles are an efficient step too.

More efficient by using a single vehicle to transport multiple people, thereby using a fraction of the fuel per person. As I stated above, a motorcycle won't match that saving.

-- According to the Ontario Road Safety Annual Report 2012 rear-end collisions were THE largest cause of injury among drivers, documented on page 48 as follows:

Rear End

35

12,598

34,171

[TD="width: 15%, bgcolor: #ffffff"] 46,804 [/TD]

Link: http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/publications/ontario-road-safety-annual-report.shtml

That would be injuries for operators of all vehicles, not just motorcycles. The greatest single danger to motorcyclists is head on collisions with oncoming left turning vehicles as cited by dozens of studies, in many countries including this one.

And where did those collisions occur? Being rear ended in an HOV lane isn't a huge possibility either. On the other hand permitting filtering at lights could very likely result in more incidents with late advanced light runners.

The arguments for motorcycles using the HOV lanes are very strong. The facts and numbers are on our side. There remains no reason the government should not seriously consider this measure for the good of everyone.

I disagree. I don't see compelling arguments in favour.

 

[hedo2002]

Excuse us OLD farts we will ALL park our bikes immediately as we are NO WHERE as compentent as you at riding. YOU ARE the man we the great unwashed aren't even worthy to share a roadway with the likes of you. ALL hail the chief.

Wow you learned to ride in California, (in MUCH worst traffic then the GTA), you are the ONLY who has accomplished this great feat of endurance and strength. BTW your "assertion|" that the lanes in California are narrower... is WRONG, According to Cal Trans the "average" lane width for california interstates is 12' WHile the MTO lists the "average" 401 lane width varies between 10' - 12'.

OOOPS just remembered the 401 is THE BUSIEST HIGHWAY IN NORTH AMERICA but California has worst traffic??? Your arguments are not based in fact at all, and YES YOU THINK YOU ARE ENTITLED. Perhaps you can post up actual FACTS, not your rose coloured glasses view of the world according to you. Rob has posted some valuable FACTS to support his position all you have posted is that we are all old pansies with NO idea how to ride.

Perhaps if you posted some FACTS and refrained from calling people names then we "may' be willing to debate, the issue in a rational manner with you. Until then I will simply view your posts as those of a person who has no reasoned arguments and must resort to the lowest form of debate, name calling.

If riding in California is so much better than here in Ontario here is a novel idea. Go back to California.

I assume the "retired donut-muncher name is referring to me., (seeing that Rob wasn't a copper). First at NO point did I say I could ride circles around you. Seocndly, I have ridden in MANY more places than Ontario. Lastly, I have attended many rider training courses, including a course designed for motorcycle officers. So I do know a bit about riding, but you have racked up 25K miles per year.. Wow, the FIRST and only rider to do that. I in my decrepid old state only manage to get in on average about 5,000 km per month, or approx 40,000 km per year. That is bike miles then there are cage miles on top of that, In the last 5 years I have managed to put just over 250,000 Km on my cage. My "average" patrol shift when I did was approx 500 km per shift. SO totla in the last 35 years I have likely racked up a "few more" km than you.

But yet I don't consider myself nearly as entitled as you sir. Also I agree if someone has "properly learned how to lane split" they will be more proficient at it then someone who has never done it. That is common sense. BUT it makes NO difference how proficient you are when some jackass, changes lanes without warning because he didn't expect you to be there. That my learned friend is where your argument falls apart. Ontario drivers are not used to lane splitting. yes they "may" over time learn, but how many riders are YOU willing to sacrifice to accomplish this. But I am sure this is were you will educate us that there has "never been one single lane splitting collision in California" EVER.

And one last thing. I don't have to experience getting kicked in the nuts, stabbed or shot. To know that they hurt and are likely unsafe activites..lol

Off you go

Maybe, but I doubt it - from what I've seen riders in Ontario that aren't club racers are light years behind where I am at just by virtue of sheer miles...learning to ride in California and using my bikes as commuter vehicles year-round in much more intense traffic than the GTA and lane sharing with narrower lanes qualifies me to comment on this issue.

Some retired donut-muncher is not going to ride circles around me without racing experience or having learned to ride somewhere else other than ONT.

I've averaged 25k miles per year in some of the worst traffic in the western world...so yes, if you think lane splitting is too "dangerous" you're probably a pansy and I will call you out on it.

People who have learned to do it safely KNOW that it isn't more dangerous and KNOW that the ridiculous arguments made here "drivers don't expect it in Ontario" "there will be carnage" are just that...ridiculous.

 

[Roadghost]

Where are you getting your information from? Please cite your sources. Everything you wrote is wrong or intentionally misleading.

Regarding motorcycles being "green"
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...are-more-polluting-than-cars-new-device-shows
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/08/greenlings-which-is-greener-having-two-wheels-or-four/
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/crttst.htm
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es0481023?journalCode=esthag

Most popular vehicles being sold in Canada? A mix of small cars and pickups. Lots of small 4 cylinder econoboxes in this list....
http://driving.ca/ram/1500/auto-news/news/top-10-best-selling-new-vehicles-in-canada
http://www.autofocus.ca/news-events/news/canadas-30-best-selling-vehicles-in-2015

Did you even read your own sources? Here's one of yours that illustrates my statement on volume:

When the crunching on the 24 distinct points of data collected by the PEMS was completed, motorcycles did prove to use less fuel per mile than the cars, and therefore also created substantially less carbon dioxide: 43 percent less for the 1980s pair, 15 percent less for the 1990s duo, and 30 percent less for the 2000s vehicles

--Carbon dioxide, the #1 greenhouse gas. Their criticisms are largely based on particulate pollution that is largely transient and in the long run irrelevant. Newer motorcycles are included in the U.S. CAFE standards, so the days of non-emission controlled bikes are numbered. Nonetheless, even the older air-cooled bikes produce less CO2 than a Civic.

--Again I would draw your attention to your own source that shows in aggregate that four-wheelers are far greater CO2 producers. Civics, RAMs, F105's, are all going to produce higher emissions than the best selling motorcycles, which just happen NOT to be litre bikes, but 125cc-250cc Hondas and Yamahas. Any assertion that motorcycles produce more CO2 than cars is patently ridiculous.

 

[caboose56]

Did you keep reading? About how motorcycles emit far more hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide than cars?

No of course not. Why would you admit to something that destroys your entire argument.

I can only conclude that you are being willfully obtuse and combative or you have a serious problem with deductive reasoning.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[macro]

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Did you keep reading? About how motorcycles emit far more hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide than cars?

No of course not. Why would you admit to something that destroys your entire argument.

I can only conclude that you are being willfully obtuse and combative or you have a serious problem with deductive reasoning.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And don't forget about particulate matter. Those three things would be what a properly catalyzing exhaust system largely turns into CO2 and water vapour.

 

[caboose56]

And don't forget about particulate matter. Those three things would be what a properly catalyzing exhaust system largely turns into CO2 and water vapour.

Minor details.

I can't wait for the next rebuttal!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nm1]

Excuse us OLD farts we will ALL park our bikes immediately as we are NO WHERE as compentent as you at riding. YOU ARE the man we the great unwashed aren't even worthy to share a roadway with the likes of you. ALL hail the chief.

damn right! lol

I assume the "retired donut-muncher name is referring to me., (seeing that Rob wasn't a copper).

Actually I did mean Rob - he gives me the LEO vibe.

The interstates do have wide lanes, but the streets in many places in LA do not....the GTA when you're off the 401 is a paradise in comparison.

The 401 being the busiest highway in North America is based on volume, not congestion.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

damn right! lol

Actually I did mean Rob - he gives me the LEO vibe.

The interstates do have wide lanes, but the streets in many places in LA do not....the GTA when you're off the 401 is a paradise in comparison.

The 401 being the busiest highway in North America is based on volume, not congestion.

Sorry, I am not, nor have I ever been, in any way involved in law enforcement. A cop did recently ask me if I was in the military though. Also no.

 

[Ugur Dinch]

OOOPS just remembered the 401 is THE BUSIEST HIGHWAY IN NORTH AMERICA but California has worst traffic??? Your arguments are not based in fact at all, and YES YOU THINK YOU ARE ENTITLED. Perhaps you can post up actual FACTS, not your rose coloured glasses view of the world according to you.

L.A is THE BUSIEST CITY IN NORTH AMERICA.

http://www.tomtom.com/en_ca/trafficindex/#/

 

[Roomie]

So 25k a year makes one an expert on all things even when said expert is incorrect? I was over 30k last season so does that make me trump you? Oh wait I forgot it would take Rossi to hang with you anyways. Splitting isn't dangerous it's the other fools on the road that are. If you can't see that then I don't know what to tell you. Carry on with your not more emissions friendly awesomer on fuel bike. Arguing with folks such as yourself is clearly pointless. My bad champ

 

[-JERICHO-]

My bad champ

 

[nm1]

So 25k a year makes one an expert on all things even when said expert is incorrect? I was over 30k last season so does that make me trump you? Oh wait I forgot it would take Rossi to hang with you anyways. Splitting isn't dangerous it's the other fools on the road that are. If you can't see that then I don't know what to tell you. Carry on with your not more emissions friendly awesomer on fuel bike. Arguing with folks such as yourself is clearly pointless. My bad champ

you can come on a ride with me and I'll teach you how to do it properly, and you'll realize the truth of what I'm saying for yourself.

you're so heavily indoctrinated that right now even with the benefit of my experience you can't be educated.

 

[Roomie]

Dude no offense to all pf ypur abilities but I've been on two wheels for 31 years. On the road for 21 of them. I'm well aware of how to do it safely. You can't forsee what the idiots on the road will do or how they'll react. Driving in the gta sucks on the best of days having to watch out for distracted and idiotic drivers. Add the lack of driver training and the large number of idiots who would be infuriated seeing a bike coming trying to get ahead of them on the way to their ever more important destination and you have a recipe for disaster. Right or wrong he rider loses vs a car every time. If the day ever comes that they make getting any license a longer more schooled process then maybe it will work but as of now here in the land of the entitled it's not going to happen.

Forum Sponsor